CCMIN090595 - Laserfiche WebLink

Michael Goodwin, 1630 Vineyard Avenue, commented that after two years of the General Plan review, the EIR process is just beginning. He submitted a request signed by the majority of the property owners of the Vineyard Corridor to have the EIR address three plans for the General Plan amendment: the property owners plan, the draft composite majority recommendation plan, and the draft minority report plan. He also asked when he could connect to City water. He objects to the General Plan recommendations regarding the Vineyard Corridor. 6, PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS Item 6a PUD-90-01-3M, California Somerset Residential Development Application for a major modification to an approved planned unit development to modify the five-foot side yard setback requirement for five homes (3364 Hartwell Court. 3373 HadSell Court, 3662 Annis Circle, 3666 Annis Circle, and 3682 Annis Circle) to reflect the existing, encroachments of the homes' porches into the five-foot side yard setback requirement. Zoning for the properties is PUD (Planned Unit Development) - Medium Density Residential District. (SR95:225) Mr. Brian Swift presented the staff report. Mr. Pico asked why Planning Commissioner Barker wanted to remove 3373 Hadsell Court from consideration of this request? Mr. Swift stated that at the Planning Commission hearing the only speaker was Diane Turner who is the neighbor to that lot. There were many issues raised at that meeting, primarily having to do with the drainage and whether or not the existing side yard setback for the porch in any way would preclude a resolution of grading and drainage issues on both the Turner property and the Grant property. Mrs. Grant also had left a letter that indicated that she was not in support of the modification unless there was an easement granted, or some other modification, to allow her to get around her porch into her side yard. Staff felt the 2 1/2 - 3 feet available was sufficient to get access to her yard for maintenance. However, she has the ability to work with Kaufman and Broad to either modify the porch or to work out some arrangement with her neighbor for some type of permanent access easement. She had contacted the City and advised that she will work with Kaufman and Broad to modify her porch, so it was felt that the PUD modification would not be necessary. Ms. Mohr asked if these porches were part of the original approval. Mr. Swift replied yes. The porches have no problem on a standard lot; it is only on the irregular shaped lots that a problem arises. 09/05/95 -7-